Gargraves 2R Track Questions

Gargraves 2-rail uses the same rail as their 3-rail track.  It is code 215, same as Atlas (and Ross).

If you're building a 2-rail layout, you will want something like Atlas code 148 at the largest.

GG 2-rail is fine if you want to use battery power/radio control and wish to use the stock (hi-rail) wheels.

If you are running 2 rail type wheels/flanges than I echo what Bob said and go with the Atlas code 148 track. It has solid rails and the track just overall looks a heck of a lot more realistic than Gargraves. On the other hand if you are running 3 rail trains which are powered by batteries that have the large flanges then you might have some trouble with typical 2 rail code 148 track especially the turnouts. In that case the Gargraves track would give you more trouble free operation but still would not look as good as code 148 Atlas 2 rail track.

Thanks guys for the info.  I was hoping to find a track which might allow running of both 2R and 3R wheel profiles.  From other threads it seems like the biggest issue is at the switch frogs, not so much the track profile, but probably just wishful thinking on my part.

There is a reason for me trying to find that solution.  My locos are 3R which I am leaning toward converting to Deadrail (so would no longer need center rail).

What I have purchased the most of is Weaver freight cars (both 2R and 3R).  I don't like the standard 3R wheels/couplers because the cars sit up too high and  wheels look very oversized.  If I just remove the 3R coupler assemble and replace with 2R "Kadee" couplers the 3R wheels rub on the bottom of the car.  I am aware that Weaver made 3R plastic wheels for this purpose and (if I can find enough) could use those, but I rather convert to Intermountain 2R Metal wheels.  This would only be needed of course on the cars that are currently 3R.  But wait there's more.....!

I have a lot of K-Line Passenger Cars.  I intend to convert the lighting to battery powered LED strips and remove the center roller.  I really don't want to spend what it would cost to convert the wheels to 2R.  From what I can tell there is no economical solution like the Intermountain Wheels.  Because of how these cars were designed (skirting) to me they 3R wheels look fine.

Now you know the rest of the story!

I welcome further recommendations.

@MainLine Steam posted:

What I have purchased the most of is Weaver freight cars (both 2R and 3R).  I don't like the standard 3R wheels/couplers because the cars sit up too high and  wheels look very oversized.  If I just remove the 3R coupler assemble and replace with 2R "Kadee" couplers the 3R wheels rub on the bottom of the car.  I am aware that Weaver made 3R plastic wheels for this purpose and (if I can find enough) could use those, but I rather convert to Intermountain 2R Metal wheels.  This would only be needed of course on the cars that are currently 3R.  But wait there's more.....!

I welcome further recommendations.

On the Weaver cars (for 3 rail operation) the coupler doubles as a coupler and a spacer. That's why when you remove the 3 rail coupler the wheels are rubbing on the underside of the car. I have never heard that the Weaver plastic wheels were designed to not allow the wheels to rub on the bottom of the car when using Kadees in a 3 rail environment unless you are using 2 rail plastic wheels? Remember when Weaver designed these cars no one in 3 rail was using Kadee couplers. It's very interesting that the Weaver 3 rail plastic wheels clear the bottom of the car. I guess they have smaller flanges than the 3 rail metal wheels.

@Hudson J1e posted:

On the Weaver cars (for 3 rail operation) the coupler doubles as a coupler and a spacer. That's why when you remove the 3 rail coupler the wheels are rubbing on the underside of the car. I have never heard that the Weaver plastic wheels were designed to not allow the wheels to rub on the bottom of the car when using Kadees in a 3 rail environment unless you are using 2 rail plastic wheels? Remember when Weaver designed these cars no one in 3 rail was using Kadee couplers. It's very interesting that the Weaver 3 rail plastic wheels clear the bottom of the car. I guess they have smaller flanges than the 3 rail metal wheels.

Thanks for the reply.  I am including pictures comparing the Weaver Wheels.  The wheels mounted on the car are 3R plastic and 2R plastic.

As far as the Weaver 3 rail wheelsets hitting the chassis when removing the coupler as mentioned. Often times the chassis features multiple ribs off the center sill. I know the flats and gondolas do. You can trim the offending ones off. Just the 2 inboard ones near the wheels. You still may need a washer for clearance. I add just what’s needed to gain clearance.  But you should be able to get by with just a thin shim for the Kadee. The car will now ride pretty much ride like the scale wheeled version. Sitting a bit lower the oversized 3 rail wheelsets seem to go away.

The hoppers are probably an issue. The underside with the sloped chutes is hard to avoid with oversize flanges.

Wow. I can see a definite difference in the overall diameter of the flange between the 3 rail plastic wheel and the 3 rail metal wheel. I don't think they were designed to solve this problem but they do solve the problem. I guess it is just enough smaller to clear everything. Learn something new every day.

I like the last picture you posted showing a comparison between the 2 rail and 3 rail plastic wheel flanges. Keep us posted on what you decide to do.

I know there is at least one other guy running 3 rail equipment with battery power on 2 rail track. I was wondering, do you have any older 3 rail (nostalgic trains) such as Lionel postwar? As I am sure you know once you remove the center rail you won't be able to run those trains, well at least not the locomotives. Does this factor into your decision? Not judging just curious.

Thanks Dave a thin shim might be all I would need.  The outside diameter of the flange just barely rubs on the underside of the floor.

Phil - I don't currently have any older Lionel, but at a show saw a pre-war 1668e.  The "urge is strong", the resistance not so much.  I do have a small "test loop" of 3R track I will keep, "just in case".